Kenton Joel Carnegie wolf attack
Encyclopedia
Kenton Joel Carnegie was a Canadian
geological engineering student. A judicial inquest carried out by the Provincial Government of Saskatchewan in 2007 concluded that he was killed by wolves on Tuesday 8 November 2005 at Points North Landing, Saskatchewan
, Canada. The conclusion of the official inquest drew later criticism because previous and more authoritative investigations disagreed with the inquest's findings. The unresolved matter of how Carnegie died is the subject of ongoing controversy.
Although there were no eyewitnesses to the attack, there had been several previous incidents in the region of wolves and black bears acting aggressively toward people. The official investigation initiated by the Chief Coroner of Saskatchewan was carried out by internationally renowned carnivore biologist Dr. Paul Paquet and Royal Canadian Police forensic anthropologist Dr. Ernest Walker, who concluded that Carnegie died as the result of a violent predatory attack, either by wolves (Canis lupus) or an American black bear
(Ursus americanus). Bear expert Dr. Stephen Herrero
came to the same conclusion, although Herrero believed the responsible predator was likely a black bear. An independent investigation by the National Geographic Society (NGS), led by animal behaviorist Dr. Jane Packard and forensic anthropologist Dr. Gary Haynes, concurred with the equivocal results of the official investigation. Similarly, bear specialist Wayne McRory concluded that a black bear was the probable predator after reviewing the physical evidence. Later, private investigations conducted on behalf of the Carnegie family by ethologist Dr. Valerius Geist, and wildlife biologist Mark McNay strengthened the case for the wolf theory. The conclusions of a third investigation commissioned by the Carnegie family and conducted by wildlife biologist Dr. Brent Patterson were equivocal, although Patterson believed wolves were most likely responsible. Among the various investigators, only Paquet and Haynes visited and carried out an onsite assessment of the accident scene.
During the late summer and autumn months of 2005, the Points North dumpsite was commonly frequented by several black bears and a pack of four wolves, which were occasionally spotted along the airstrip adjacent to the camp. According to testimony from a camp worker, the wolves at the dump frequently disregarded his presence and would adjust their arrival with that of the front-end loader, tearing into the garbage bags the moment they hit the ground. This behavior suggests the wolves were uninhibited by the presence of people or loud machinery.
On 4 November 2005, Todd Svarckopf and Chris Van Galder, who were stationed at the Points North camp near Wollaston Lake
, decided to walk out to a nearby junkyard to look at abandoned aircraft. While passing through a forested area, the two were approached by a dark wolf only a few hundred metres from the camp compound. The two men attempted to walk back to the camp but the wolf walked directly up to Svarckopf, who yelled at it. The animal retreated a few steps but pressed forward as the men walked away, closely followed by a lighter coloured wolf. The dark wolf moved directly toward Chris and did not retreat when he yelled at it. When Svarckopf turned around to face Van Galder, the lighter coloured wolf advanced toward his back, retreating only when Svarckopf turned to face it. The two armed themselves with spruce
sticks and kept the wolves at bay with swinging motions. The two men moved toward the edge of the brush line along the runway, with the wolves following but keeping out of reach of the sticks. The wolves positioned themselves between the men and the runway, in what was described as an apparent attempt to herd them back into the heavier cover. The two men moved out of the forest and onto an open runway, with the wolves still following them as they headed back to camp. The wolves were kept at bay with the sticks and only left when the two arrived at the camp compound. Several photos were taken by Van Galder near the end of the encounter. The entire incident lasted 10–15 minutes.
Svarckopf and Van Galder did not volunteer information to the RCMP investigator about their encounter with wolves, nor did they provide images of the encounter. This unusual behavior raised suspicions among investigators and brought into question the credibility of the two individuals. To add to the confusion, media versions of the event and hearsay reports from Points North employees offered several different and conflicting descriptions of the encounter.
Eventually, investigators Paquet and Walker asked the RCMP Major Crimes Unit to find Svarckopf and Van Galder and obtain statements. Van Galder never did provide a statement but 4 months after Carnegie was killed Svarckopf was interviewed by the RCMP. He reported that the wolves never growled or barked as wolves defending territory sometimes do, but snapped their teeth and jaws. Notably, this behavior is rarely displayed by wolves and is known to occur only when wolves are threatened and under extreme stress or possible attack. Additionally, Svarckopf claimed that he and Van Galder tried to warn their co-workers (including Kenton Carnegie) at the camp about the wolves, but were humorously accused of teasing the animals. Their story, however, was not corroborated by co-workers who claimed Svarckopf and Van Galder told them several different versions of what had occurred.
Carnegie was on his fall co-op term in his third year of geological engineering at the University of Waterloo
. He and a colleague were in the Athabasca basin performing airborne surveying work for Ottawa-based Sander Geophysics. A few days before his death, Carnegie wanted to go for a walk, but according to official statements made to RCMP by Svarckopf, Svarckopf and Van Galder told him of their encounter a few days prior and claimed to have "implored" him not to go. The Carnegie family, however, questions this claim, maintaining that permission was given by Chris Van Galder.
Despite the alleged warnings, on November 8 at roughly 15:30, Carnegie went for a walk alone, stating that he would return by 17:00. At 19:00, he had not returned, and Van Galder and Svarckopf called Mark Eikel, part owner of the Points North camp to assist them in their search. After scouring the camp, the trio noticed Carnegie's tracks leading outside the camp and followed them to the lake shore. The men noticed wolf tracks on the shore and returned to the camp to get a rifle before continuing their search. Carnegie's body was found soon after by Eikel outside the campgrounds, 35 miles northwest of Wollaston Lake. Using a flashlight, Eikel viewed the body from about 10 m (32 ft). He made no attempt to determine if Carnegie was alive or how he had been injured. Together with Svarckopf and Van Galder, who did not see the body, he retreated to Points North to notify the Royal Canadian Mounted Police
(RCMP) in Wallaston Lake of their discovery, informing police that Carnegie had been killed by wolves. The message that a person had been killed by wolves at Points North Camp was then forwarded to RCMP Constable Noey and local Coroner Rosalie Tsannie-Burseth. Meanwhile, Eikel and Points North employee Bob Burseth (Rosalie Tsannie-Burseth's husband) returned to the site about 40 minutes later to find the mutilated body and confirm that Carnegie was dead. Upon arriving at the scene three hours later, RCMP constable Noey saw from a distance of 30–40 metres the reflection of two sets of eyes, which he assumed were wolves because of wolf tracks seen earlier and because he had been told he was retrieving the body of a person killed by wolves. Notably, however, no wolves were ever observed at the scene of the accident as confirmed by Noey in the following quotes.
Many months after the accident, Coroner Tsannie-Burseth reported that during the recovery of the body, wolf howls were frequently heard in the vicinity. Her husband, Bob Burseth, who was also present, felt confident that they were within 400 metres of the kill site. However, in the official police statements recorded at the time of the accident, none of the witnesses, Coroner Tsannie-Burseth, or Constable Noey remembered hearing wolves vocalizing in any manner. Noey thought he might have heard wolves moving in the bushes but was not sure. Tsannie-Burseth stated that she could "feel' the presence of wolves but had heard nothing. To dissuade the animals from approaching, the search party built a fire and periodically fired shots into the air during the body recovery.
Rosalie Tsannie-Burseth, the province’s coroner
for the north who had arranged the removal of Carnegie's body, gave a hypothetical reconstruction of what happened based on what she observed. She speculated that Carnegie had walked from the camp and by the time he was a kilometre away near a frozen lake, a wolf began following his tracks. Boot prints in the snow showed that Carnegie quickened his pace, as two more wolves approached him from the sides. The first apparent struggle occurred 2.2 metres (7 ft) from where the chase began. Four more scuffle sites were found leading to where his body was discovered. Tsannie-Burseth believed that Carnegie probably fought hard before finally succumbing.
examined Carnegie's death in an hour-long episode of Hunter Hunted
entitled Shadow Stalkers. The credits acknowledge Coroner Rosalie Tsannie-Burseth, Constable Alphonse Noey, Dr. Paul Paquet, Dr. S. Herrero, and Tim Trottier of SERM (Saskatchewan Environment Resource Management). Wollaston Lake Coroner Rosalie Tsannie-Burseth and RCMP Constable Alphonse Noey are featured prominently in the documentary, providing commentary and personal insights concerning details of the accident. Animal behaviorist and wolf specialist Dr. Jane Packard, who assisted in the National Geographic investigation, reviewed the images taken by Todd Svarckopf and Chris Van Galder during their November 4 encounter with the wolves at Points North. Based on well understood wolf behaviors evident in the images, she speculated that Svarckopf and Van Galder had provoked the wolves. Notably, workers at Points North Camp had accused Svarckopf and Van Galder of "teasing" the wolves they encountered. She thought that negative experience might have caused the wolves to behave aggressively toward humans in future encounters. Renowned forensic anthropologist Dr. Gary Haynes conducted an onsite investigation of the accident site, interviewed key witnesses, and examined the images of Carnegie's body and tracks taken at the site by Constable Noey. The images were provided to National Geographic by the RCMP. Working together, Packard and Haynes concluded that Carnegie was killed by either wolves or a black bear, and that both might have fed on his body. Finally, the National Geographic investigation emphasized that the mix of uncertain circumstantial evidence implicated both wolves and bears, precluding the possibility of a definitive conclusion as to which predator was responsible for Carnegie's death.
s, as grizzly bear
s, cougars and free ranging dog
s were not known to frequent the Points North area. The report, however, was equivocal as to which predator was responsible, noting that most of the evidence, all of which was circumstantial, was unavoidably confounded by search and recovery efforts. In addition, the report contended that a very poor primary assessment of the accident scene by an inexperienced police constable and local coroner further compromised the quality and reliability of the evidence. Included among the criticisms were investigative bias resulting from preconditioned expectations of a "wolf attack" at Points North, failure to secure the accident scene from intrusion of people and wildlife, a 20-hour delay in carrying out the site assessment during which time at least three wolves visited the site, failure to cast impressions of footwear so that tracks of searchers and investigators could be distinguished from those of the victim, failure to annotate digital images taken on the accident scene, and serious discrepancies in important details of the official police report. These unresolvable problems were compounded by changing stories from key witnesses, RCMP investigator Constable Noey, and local coroner Tsannie concerning important and significant aspects of events that occurred before, after, and during the accident.
Two wolves from the area were killed about 56 hours after the accident by investigating conservation officers and taken for examination to the University of Saskatchewan
. The digestive systems of both wolves were empty, except for a few small residual items. One of the wolves, a black and white 48 kg (106 lb) male, estimated to be 4–5 years of age, was found to have undigested plasticised fabric, small black hairs, and what appeared to be connective tissue within its colon
and rectum
, though lab analyses showed the latter to be vegetable matter. Microscopic examination suggested that the recovered hair was possibly human in origin. However, DNA analyis by the RCMP forensic lab rejected that assessment. Given the high quality and excellent condition of the tissue samples (hairs complete with roots), the RCMP concluded the hairs were not of human origin. The lab tested only for human DNA, so the complete absence of DNA is strong evidence that the sample was not human. Accordingly, no human remains were found in the digestive systems of the wolves thought to have killed and fed on Carnegie.
There was no trace of rabies virus, nor was there any morphological indication suggesting it was a wolf-dog hybrid. The animal was described in the necropsy report as being very fat, well muscled and in excellent nutritional condition. Paquet later stated that "these were the healthiest wolves I've ever seen." Although he noted that "no definitive animal sign was evident in any of the images taken the night of the accident", he noted that wolf, fox, and bear tracks were visible on the photos taken the following day of the surrounding area. These images,taken 20–22 hours after the attack occurred, also showed unidientified shoe prints of several people. Paquet and Walker stated that the body had been dragged 50–60 metres as reported by RCMP Constable Noey, Burseth, and Eikel, as well as physically measured by Paquet at the scene. This suggested but did not confirm a black bear culprit, as black bears often drag their prey away from the initial kill and feeding site, especially following disturbances by people. In Paquet's own extensive experience and that of other wolf biologists, wolves are virtually unknown to drag larger prey (i.e. more than 40 kg) more than a few metres.
Paquet and Walker also pointed to the fact that Carnegie's heart, lungs and liver were intact, stating that in Paquet's experience and that of other wolf experts, wolves usually eat those organs and surrounding fat first. Moreover, the stomach, intestines, and kidneys were consumed first, which Paquet stated is unusual for wolves consuming wild prey. Consumption of these organs, however, is consistent with documented descriptions of black bears feeding on humans, especially victims who had recently consumed a meal. Notably, Carnegie ate lunch just before leaving on his walk. Paquet and Walker noted, however, that due to the scarcity of documented wolf attacks in North America, it would be difficult to discern what a wolf attack would look like. Mark McNay agreed.
This point of agreement is of profound significance because it confirms that interpretation of the circumstantial evidence found at the scene is fraught with irresolvable uncertainty. In this regard, Patterson commented that “... based on the material I did see it seemed less plausible that a bear was responsible than wolves, but I acknowledge that barring an actual eyewitness account a definitive answer will remain elusive.”
Similarly equivosal, but favoring the bear theory, bear specialist Wayne McRory concluded that a black bear was the probable predator after reviewing the physical evidence. Paquet's telephone consultations with bear expert Dr. Stephen Herrero came to the same conclusion: Herrero believed the responsible predator was likely a black bear.
Paul Paquet was quoted in an issue of the National Wildlife magazine;
The time of day of the attack was also claimed to be consistent with documented bear predation on humans;
Paquet and Walker also identified claw marks on the body, something inconsistent with wolves, which attack with their teeth. The claw marks were clearly distinguishable because the corresponding marks of lower and upper jaws that characterize bite wounds were absent from the body. Based on examination of bite impressions from 100 adult wolves and 100 adult black bears, Paquet and Walker concluded that it was difficult to reliably differentiate the bite marks of wolves and bears, as the canine teeth of adult wolves can leave near identical marks to those of similarly sized black bears. In addition, only 2 bite marks were clearly discernible on the body. Both were post- or peri-mortem and the canine teeth did not penetrate the skin. There were no impressions of pre-molars, which are characteristic of wounds caused by wolves In their report, Paquet and Walker stated that based on well described wolf behaviours (body postures, position of the lips, position of the ears, position of the tail), the 3 wolves shown in the photographs taken by Chris Van Galder were either relaxed or behaving defensively in response to a provocation by Svarckopf. Further, Svarckopf is shown relaxed and laughing in one of the images. Paquet questioned the reliability of interviews with the local constable and coroner, as well as members of the search party, due to numerous incongruities and his awareness that eyewitnesses were “notoriously unreliable”. Accordingly, inconsistencies, contradictions, and changing witness and investigator statements on critical points of evidence raised concerns about the credibility and reliability of the investigators and witnesses. Paquet and Walker's report listed 14 experts that were consulted, including well known wolf and bear biologists in North America and Europe, though it did not identify which experts examined the available evidence. Paquet later stated in a phone conversation with Ontario Government wildlife expert Brent Petterson that the animal that dragged Carnegie's body was strong enough to break his belt when his pants were pulled down over his legs and boots.
The investigative report by Paquet and Walker was met with criticism by the Carnegie family and their representatives. Todd Svarckopf, Chris Van Galder, Mark Eikel and Bob Burseth, who were the first four witnesses, saw the scene before it was disturbed by repeat visits by themselves and later visits from the coroner, two game wardens and the RCMP. According to Geist, all the witnesses stated in private interviews that the animals they saw on the scene, as well as the tracks in the snow, were wolves. However, Geist's claim is contradicted by the official police interviews. None of the witnesses remembered seeing any animals at the scene, although all witnesses reported observing wolf tracks. Bob Burseth, an employee of Points North Camp and a hunter who was frequently involved in tracking and killing of aggressive problem bears near Points North, confirmed that had bears been in the area, he would have known. He also stated that he knew the differences between bear and wolf tracks, and was adamant that on that night he saw only wolf prints. Burseth's wife, aboriginal Coroner Rosalie Tsannie-Burseth Aboriginal
, found no bear tracks and stated there were only wolf tracks. However, contrary to claims in McNay's report, neither Bob Burseth or Rosalie Tsannie-Ruseth identified fox tracks at the scene, although fox tracks were clearly evident in the images taken at the accident scene by Constable Noey. This failure to notice what were clear and obvious tracks raised serious concerns for government investigators about the reliability of Burseth's and Tsannie-Burseth's other observations. Constable Noey, an RCMP officer, originally claimed that some wolf prints were placed directly within Carnegie's prints, a behaviour some incorrectly believe is associated with wolves stalking prey. However, when queried by RCMP investigators from Major Crimes, he changed his story to say he was not certain that was the case. Conservation Officers Kelly Crayne and Mario Gaudet, who investigated the accident site two days after the event and several snowfalls, wrote in their report “Officers investigated the site and found numerous wolf tracks in the area. No other large animal tracks could be found.”
Bears had not been sighted at Points North Camp for over a month, as the death occurred during what some suggest is their annual hibernation
cycle. Nonetheless, there were many confirmed sightings of black bears in the region throughout October and early November, including nearby Cigar Lake Mine
and Rabbit Lake Mine. The Fall of 2005 was the second warmest on record and temperature influences the time of denning. In addition, aggressive and garbage-conditioned bears were a chronic problem at Points North Camp during September and early October, as well as previous years. Accordingly, McNay states that a problem bear was killed near the Points North Camp kitchen in September 2005, although SERM issued no permit to kill a bear, which is a legal requirement in the Province of Saskatchewan. In addition, the claimed killing of an aggressive problem black bear was never reported to SERM, so the fate of the animal(s)is unknown.
After reading Paquet's report in August 2006, Carnegie's family approached Ontario Government wildlife expert Brent Petterson, to assess the evidence given by Paquet and Walker pointing to a bear culprit. Although Patterson corresponded with Paquet, and was initially convinced by his findings, he softened his views upon examining photographs and reports. Upon looking at the photograph showing what Patterson assumed were the bear tracks indicated by Paquet, Patterson noted that the snow in which they occurred was heavily slush
ed, and that a clear wolf print was present on a nearby rock, following the travel direction of the tracks. This suggested they were made by the same animal, although he was uncertain because of his inexperience in track identification.
Regarding the body's lack of disarticulation, Patterson stated that such a process only occurs after wolves have eaten all available soft tissues, which had yet to occur with Carnegie. This observation was consistent with Paquet and Walker's determination that most soft tissue had not been consumed, but contradicted claims by NcNay and Geist that nearly all soft tissue had been removed. Patterson also noted that lacerations on Carnegie's right forearm had flesh pulled out of them. Patterson wrote that this damage was likely caused by the canine teeth of a wolf, feeding on or dragging the body. However, Paquet and Walker determined the wound was caused by claws because there were no corresponding wounds from upper and lower jaws, which would be expected if jaws had been clamped around the arm so the body could be dragged. Patterson found that the drag distance of the body reported by Paquet was inconsistent with that reported by Constable Noey, who noted on a diagram of the accident scene that the body had been dragged only 20 metres. Noey, however, stated in his official narrative report cited and reviewed by Patterson, McNay, and Geist that the body was dragged about 50 m, which was consistent with the observation of other eyewitnesses. Further, the straight line distance as measured by a surveyors tape at the accident site was 52 metres.
Nevertheless, Patterson questioned the reliability of witness Bob Burseth who claimed the body was dragged more than 50 m, suggesting darkness and duress affected his judgment.
Among the photographed injuries present on the body, Patterson noted a bite mark on the right side of Carnegie’s right calf/ shin which he stated was consistent with the wolf bite marks he and his research team commonly observed on ungulate prey carcasses. Paquet and Walker identified the mark as occurring post mortem and indistinguishable from those left by black bears.
He also found that contrary to what Paquet said via telephone regarding the breaking of Carnegie's belt, there was no evidence of a belt on the photographs taken by the RCMP, nor was a belt mentioned in the personal effects list of the victim's necropsy report. However, primary witness Bob Burseth clearly stated in his official statement to the RCMP that he saw a belt when he first observed Carnegie's body. Patterson wrote that Carnegie was wearing lined nylon trousers, which he claimed do not have belt loops. In fact, Carnegie was wearing jeans with overpants. Although Patterson could not rule out the possibility that Kenton’s pants were peeled off first and then later snagged on the stump during dragging, he concluded that the removal of Carnegie's trousers, rather than being the deliberate act of a bear, could have occurred entirely due to wolves dragging his body and getting them caught on the tree stump. However, photographs of the body taken at the scene of the accident showed clearly this was not what happened. He saw no other evidence of clothing having been “peeled” off rather than simply ripped or torn during feeding. Criticism was also launched at Paquet's list of cited experts, as it failed to specify which of them actually examined the evidence. Patterson stated that he became suspicious when he contacted carnivore biologist Maria de Almeida of the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, who had been cited in Paquet's report as an expert. de Almeida was originally unaware that she was listed as an expert. In her communication with Patterson, she stated;
Working under a suggestion by Patterson, Carnegie's family later approached wolf biologist Mark McNay on 18 January 2007, who at the time, worked for the Alaska Department of Fish and Game
. Three years prior, McNay studied 80 events in Alaska and Canada where wolves closely approached or attacked people, finding 39 cases of aggression by apparently healthy wolves, and 29 cases of fearless behavior by non-aggressive wolves. After examining photographs of Carnegie's body and the area around it, McNay concluded that the argument in favour of a bear culprit was weak. He argued in his report that black bears at the time would have been hibernating 12 days before the attack occurred. In addition, even if a bear was still active, an ample food supply would have been available from the nearby landfill 2 km from the kill site. Regardless, none of the camp employees saw bears or bear tracks, either the month before or after the attack occurred. He countered the purported claim by Paquet and Walker that no pattern has been documented of "fatal wolf attacks" on humans in the evening or the autumn season by noting that wolf attacks had been documented in Ontario and Alaska during the late summer/autumn season and evening hours. However, Paquet and Walker responded by noting that McNay had mistakenly attributed a claim to them they never made. Further, they noted the attacks referred to by McNay were not fatal and were atypical of documented incidences. McNay also cited examples from Hazaribagh
, India
, in which children were recorded to have been attacked at dusk. After finding out about the dump site near the camp, and hearing the testimony of camp workers that wolves would consume garbage in full view of people, McNay read Todd Svarckopf's testimony on the non-lethal wolf encounter four days before Carnegie's death. He concluded that the behaviour of the wolves was consistent with food-conditioned animals that had been fed, and expected a food reward. He argued that the wolves would have trotted away if they had felt fearful or threatened. In contrast, the behaviour of one of the wolves described in the testimony and shown in the photographs was indicative of a wolf in an aroused state and capable of an attack. After looking at the tracks shown in the photographs taken by the RCMP, he affirmed that he could not see any bear tracks. He stated that any similarity in the shape of any of those tracks to either a bear or wolf foot was purely coincidental, due to the overflow obliterating the true foot shape. He also stated that the assumption that a bear made the tracks could be disproved by the direction they were heading. If it was a bear, the triangular shape of the tracks would have indicated that the animal was moving toward the position of the photographer, but close examination revealed that the animal was travelling away from that direction. This was confirmed after McNay showed the photographs to five experienced Alaskan Pilots and wolf trackers, three of which were biologists of the ADFG, whereas the other two formerly worked as wolf survey pilots in Yellowstone National Park
. None of the five individuals, however, were identified. McNay gave additional evidence for wolves making the prints by describing their track pattern;
McNay noted that Carnegie's body lacked the severe head trauma and broken bones he believed to be characteristic of a fatal bear attack. He argued that the areas of Carnegie's body where flesh had been removed were inconsistent with bear feeding patterns; most of the stomach and intestines were eaten, and a large portion of the muscle mass from the ribs to the knees was consumed. From this, McNay pointed out that bears are solitary feeders, and claimed without providing evidence that victims usually have only one area of their body eaten; whereas those of wolves, which feed collectively, will have multiple areas of their body consumed, as in Carnegie's case. He then argued that the amount of flesh consumed in the short time of the victim's death (estimated by him to be 70–80 lb (32–36 kg) of what was once 145 lb (66 kg) made a bear more unlikely;
As with Patterson, McNay cited the bruise on Carnegie’s right lower leg (measured 4 × 2.5 cm), as well as what appeared to be bite mark impressions associated with the bruising as further evidence of wolf involvement. He stated that the position of the marks on the right shin indicated that the bite had been inflicted from the front or side, which was consistent with injuries observed in 13 survivors of wolf attacks in Alaska and Canada. In many of these cases, the initial bites were fleeting and occurred in the hands or legs, and left only torn clothing, scratched skin, or minor puncture wounds. For comparison, McNay provided photographs of wolf-inflicted bites on three people. In one such photograph, the bite mark and bruising inflicted on the victim (Canadian biologist Robert Mulders) was similar in size and location to that seen on Carnegie's leg. Another photo, featuring the injured lower back of a six year old boy attacked by a wolf near Icy Bay Canada, showed bite marks ½-3 cm in length; many of which were similar to those found near the nose, eyes, and right arm of Carnegie’s body.
Regarding the inversion of Carnegie's pants, McNay pointed out that eyewitness Bob Burseth claimed that Carnegies pants were still on when he and Mark Eikel returned to the accident scene to inspect the body the second time. It was only when they returned with the RCMP two hours and twenty minutes later that the pants were completely removed from the legs and ankles, pulled tightly over Carnegie's large winter boots. McNay theorized that the pants had been removed accidentally after they got caught on a tree stump whilst the body was being dragged. However, Paquet and Walker have noted that examination of drag marks evident in images of Carnegie's body taken at the accident site easily disprove the theory.
In response to Paquet's assertion that wolves typically do not drag victims above 40 kg, McNay cited five cases in Canada and Alaska, as well as 195 cases from India where wolves attempted to drag/carry off their human victims when rescuers arrived. Paquet and Walker, however, made no such assertion. As quoted above (see Official Investigation), they maintained that is extremely rare for wolves to drag larger prey more than 10 metres in one direction because individual wolves typically pull in different directions, which eventually disarticulates carcasses. Moreover, the citations provided by McNay as proof that wolves drag their prey, described only children weighing less than 40 kg; which confirmed Paquet and Walker’s initial claim that McNay was attempting to dispute. McNay did provide an example (as well as photo) of a moose calf dragged by 2 wolves for 20 metres weighing 150 lb (68 kg).
McNay also claimed that Carnegie's body had already lost most of its original mass, therefore facilitating the dragging process. This claim, however, contradicted Patterson's observation that most soft tissue had not been consumed. After reviewing Constable Noey's description of the tracks within the attack site, he found them consistent with those of a long struggle characteristic of wolf attacks;
McNay speculated that had a black bear killed Carnegie, only to have it usurped by wolves, there would have been a lengthy period of confrontation between the animals; resulting in well represented tracks around the kill site. He argued that Paquet's organ theory was flawed, because wolves and bears will eat all organs given the chance, and the wolves had been interrupted whilst feeding. Also, seeing as Carnegie was likely their first human victim, it would have been impossible to extrapolate normal, specific feeding behaviours.
However, McNay agreed with Paquet's viewpoint on the scarcity of fatal wolf attacks in North America making it difficult to discern with certainty what one looked like, stating in his report:
Ethologist Dr. Valerius Geist of the University of Calgary
Alberta
, who had himself experienced aggressive behaviour from wolves in his home on Vancouver Island
began investigating case in the Winter of 2006. Upon examining the photographs taken by Todd Svarckopf and Chris Van Galder, he found that one of the animals had exposed canines, a raised upper lip, the corners of its mouth slightly opened and ears pitched forward. The wolf was positioned in a slight crouch with its hind legs braced for a lunge forward. The tail was held in a position bordering on neutral/confident. Its eyes were also averted, to which he stated that in wolf communication is done by confident, domineering individuals . He stated that rather than a defensive posture usually taken by wolves feeling threatened, it was one of assertive aggression with no hint of fear or insecurity. Finnish biologist Kaarlo Nygrén of the Game and Fisheries Research Institute of Ilomantsi
gave a similar conclusion on examining the photographs. However, noted ethologist and wolf specialist Dr. Harry Frank, who was asked by Geist to review his report, concluded that Geist's interpretation was in serious error. Dr. Frank's assessment concurred with that of Drs. Paquet and Walker as well as Dr. Jane Packard of National Geographic.
Geist also examined photographs of where Carnegie died, and notes given by the RCMP on Carnegie's movements reconstructed from tracks. Geist found the bear hypothesis more doubtful upon reading in the hypothetical reconstruction that Carnegie was repeatedly knocked down and got up before dying. This, he reasoned, would make a bear unlikely, as bears are adept at pinning down prey and preventing them from standing. Geist also suggested that bears, after making a kill, usually drag it into heavy brush to eat in peace, whereas Carnegie was immediately eaten in the open after he died; a behaviour consistent with wolves. Paquet has noted, however, that there is no evidence that Carnegie was eaten immediately after being killed as time of death is unknown. Geist responded to a statement that he incorrectly attributed to Paquet that only a bear would have dragged Carnegie's body, by pointing out that the body was only seen to be dragged after the RCMP officer arrived on the scene, added to the fact that the body was not hidden in vegetation as Geist believes a bear would have done. In addition, Geist claimed that upon looking at the photographs showing tracks surrounding Carnegie's body, the tracks belonged to wolves of varying size, with no sign of bear or other animals. Yet, according to all other investigators, no images were taken at the scene or are in evidence that show Kenton's body and discernable wolf or bear tracks. Geist seemed to have confused images of the body taken the night of the attack with those shot some 15 hours after Carnegie's body was recovered. The later images revealed the tracks of people, wolves, foxes, and possibly black bear; but none taken at the specific location where the body was found showed any tracks.
Geist sent copies of the photographs of the scene to European biologists Dr. Eirik Granqvist of Borgå, Finland
and Dr. Nygrén. Upon inspecting the photos, they both came to the same conclusion, responding;
Subsequently, Geist revised his official statement to include the tracks of fox. Geist was unable to find any evidence of bear predation on the body, based on the nature of the bite marks. In his report, he wrote that contrary to the statement by Paquet that “The clothes and skin been stripped away, indicating the so-called banana-peel eating technique common to bears”, the skin had not been peeled back. The photography revealed typical wolf inflicted injuries, including clean cuts, and slices cut somewhat at right angles to the bones, consistent with carnassials cutting the tissue. Black bears on the other hand pluck flesh with their incisors, as their molars are blunt and are evolved for crushing rather than slicing. Geist, upon observing the amount of missing tissue concluded that in the three hours before the body's discovery, at least three and possibly four wolves had fully fed on 35–40 kg (77-88 lb) of body mass. A black bear would have been unlikely to have consumed that much body tissue in the short time available. In response to Paquets statement that intact organs suggested wolves were not involved, Geist pointed to his own observations and those of Russian and European scientists, citing cases in which some wolf packs preferred to consume the fat deposits first, as had been the case with Carnegie.
Geist commented on the nature of the bruises on Carnegie's shin;
The presiding judge concluded that Geist lacked relevant expertise and did not qualify as an expert witness, which prohibited inclusion of his affidavit and testimony. She noted that Geist had never published a peer-reviewed paper or had a grant proposal funded concerning wolves or bears. Similarly, Patterson was also excluded as an expert by the judge, but his evaluation was introduced indirectly by the Carnegie Family's attorney, Harold Johnson. Paquet, Walker, and McNay were deemed qualified experts and all testified at the inquest. The Province of Saskatchewan chose not to present an affirmative case supporting the findings of the Chief Coroner. Accordingly, the lawyer reprsenting the crown did not carry out in depth examinations of witnesses. Further, judicial inquests in Saskatchewan apply a much lower standard for determining cause of death (balance of probabilities or 51%) than do determinations by the Chief Coroner (reasonable doubt or 95%). On 1 November 2007, following three days of testimony and examination of photographs of Carnegie's body and the site of the accident, a six member jury concluded that wolves were responsible for Carnegie's death.
Dr. L. David Mech
, an internationally recognized wolf expert, stated; "Mr Carnegie's death is a terrible tragedy but one fatal wolf attack in the recorded history of North America does not warrant widespread alarm".
Valerius Geist launched criticism on the official investigation, stating that it was too focused on establishing Carnegie’s cause of death, while ignoring wider policy issues such as the alleged failure of some wolf biologists to notice that the wolves of that area had been acting in an unusually bold manner toward humans before the attack, and that there was no real action taken to tackle the circumstances which he believed had led to the attack; freely available human waste added to a scarcity of natural prey, stated by Geist to be a result of increased wolf populations. He also criticised the wildlife officials of the area for taking no action against wolves clearly showing signs of habituation to humans until it was too late. He pointed to the fact that wolves had been sighted in the area weeks before Carnegie's death, and would frequently feed at the Point North garbage dump whilst ignoring workers. This he argued, caused the wolves to no longer see humans as a source of fear, but of food. In conclusion to his report, he wrote;
Kenton's father, Kim, expressed concern that the Saskatchewan Environments plan to stop further wolf attacks were inadequate, and did not address the problem of landfills which were thought to have been fed upon by the wolves, causing them to become habituated to humans. He stated that the best measure would be to incinerate the garbage, rather than to abandon it.
Canada
Canada is a North American country consisting of ten provinces and three territories. Located in the northern part of the continent, it extends from the Atlantic Ocean in the east to the Pacific Ocean in the west, and northward into the Arctic Ocean...
geological engineering student. A judicial inquest carried out by the Provincial Government of Saskatchewan in 2007 concluded that he was killed by wolves on Tuesday 8 November 2005 at Points North Landing, Saskatchewan
Saskatchewan
Saskatchewan is a prairie province in Canada, which has an area of . Saskatchewan is bordered on the west by Alberta, on the north by the Northwest Territories, on the east by Manitoba, and on the south by the U.S. states of Montana and North Dakota....
, Canada. The conclusion of the official inquest drew later criticism because previous and more authoritative investigations disagreed with the inquest's findings. The unresolved matter of how Carnegie died is the subject of ongoing controversy.
Although there were no eyewitnesses to the attack, there had been several previous incidents in the region of wolves and black bears acting aggressively toward people. The official investigation initiated by the Chief Coroner of Saskatchewan was carried out by internationally renowned carnivore biologist Dr. Paul Paquet and Royal Canadian Police forensic anthropologist Dr. Ernest Walker, who concluded that Carnegie died as the result of a violent predatory attack, either by wolves (Canis lupus) or an American black bear
American black bear
The American black bear is a medium-sized bear native to North America. It is the continent's smallest and most common bear species. Black bears are omnivores, with their diets varying greatly depending on season and location. They typically live in largely forested areas, but do leave forests in...
(Ursus americanus). Bear expert Dr. Stephen Herrero
Stephen Herrero
Stephen Herrero is a Canadian doctor of animal behaviour and ecology, and was a professor at University of Calgary. He is the author of Bear Attacks: Their Causes and Avoidance, which has been described as "authoritative" and "required reading" on the topic.Herrero was born in San Francisco, and...
came to the same conclusion, although Herrero believed the responsible predator was likely a black bear. An independent investigation by the National Geographic Society (NGS), led by animal behaviorist Dr. Jane Packard and forensic anthropologist Dr. Gary Haynes, concurred with the equivocal results of the official investigation. Similarly, bear specialist Wayne McRory concluded that a black bear was the probable predator after reviewing the physical evidence. Later, private investigations conducted on behalf of the Carnegie family by ethologist Dr. Valerius Geist, and wildlife biologist Mark McNay strengthened the case for the wolf theory. The conclusions of a third investigation commissioned by the Carnegie family and conducted by wildlife biologist Dr. Brent Patterson were equivocal, although Patterson believed wolves were most likely responsible. Among the various investigators, only Paquet and Haynes visited and carried out an onsite assessment of the accident scene.
Prior events in Saskatchewan
Before Carnegie's death, there had been several incidents in Saskatchewan of wolves acting aggressively toward people. Additionally, more than 300 occurrences of black bears behaving aggressively toward humans have been documented in the Province, including three fatal attacks.During the late summer and autumn months of 2005, the Points North dumpsite was commonly frequented by several black bears and a pack of four wolves, which were occasionally spotted along the airstrip adjacent to the camp. According to testimony from a camp worker, the wolves at the dump frequently disregarded his presence and would adjust their arrival with that of the front-end loader, tearing into the garbage bags the moment they hit the ground. This behavior suggests the wolves were uninhibited by the presence of people or loud machinery.
Wollaston Lake
Wollaston Lake is located in northeastern Saskatchewan, Canada. With a surface area of 2286 km² , it is the largest lake in the world that drains naturally in two directions...
, decided to walk out to a nearby junkyard to look at abandoned aircraft. While passing through a forested area, the two were approached by a dark wolf only a few hundred metres from the camp compound. The two men attempted to walk back to the camp but the wolf walked directly up to Svarckopf, who yelled at it. The animal retreated a few steps but pressed forward as the men walked away, closely followed by a lighter coloured wolf. The dark wolf moved directly toward Chris and did not retreat when he yelled at it. When Svarckopf turned around to face Van Galder, the lighter coloured wolf advanced toward his back, retreating only when Svarckopf turned to face it. The two armed themselves with spruce
Spruce
A spruce is a tree of the genus Picea , a genus of about 35 species of coniferous evergreen trees in the Family Pinaceae, found in the northern temperate and boreal regions of the earth. Spruces are large trees, from tall when mature, and can be distinguished by their whorled branches and conical...
sticks and kept the wolves at bay with swinging motions. The two men moved toward the edge of the brush line along the runway, with the wolves following but keeping out of reach of the sticks. The wolves positioned themselves between the men and the runway, in what was described as an apparent attempt to herd them back into the heavier cover. The two men moved out of the forest and onto an open runway, with the wolves still following them as they headed back to camp. The wolves were kept at bay with the sticks and only left when the two arrived at the camp compound. Several photos were taken by Van Galder near the end of the encounter. The entire incident lasted 10–15 minutes.
Svarckopf and Van Galder did not volunteer information to the RCMP investigator about their encounter with wolves, nor did they provide images of the encounter. This unusual behavior raised suspicions among investigators and brought into question the credibility of the two individuals. To add to the confusion, media versions of the event and hearsay reports from Points North employees offered several different and conflicting descriptions of the encounter.
Eventually, investigators Paquet and Walker asked the RCMP Major Crimes Unit to find Svarckopf and Van Galder and obtain statements. Van Galder never did provide a statement but 4 months after Carnegie was killed Svarckopf was interviewed by the RCMP. He reported that the wolves never growled or barked as wolves defending territory sometimes do, but snapped their teeth and jaws. Notably, this behavior is rarely displayed by wolves and is known to occur only when wolves are threatened and under extreme stress or possible attack. Additionally, Svarckopf claimed that he and Van Galder tried to warn their co-workers (including Kenton Carnegie) at the camp about the wolves, but were humorously accused of teasing the animals. Their story, however, was not corroborated by co-workers who claimed Svarckopf and Van Galder told them several different versions of what had occurred.
Disappearance and subsequent discovery
University of Waterloo
The University of Waterloo is a comprehensive public university in the city of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. The school was founded in 1957 by Drs. Gerry Hagey and Ira G. Needles, and has since grown to an institution of more than 30,000 students, faculty, and staff...
. He and a colleague were in the Athabasca basin performing airborne surveying work for Ottawa-based Sander Geophysics. A few days before his death, Carnegie wanted to go for a walk, but according to official statements made to RCMP by Svarckopf, Svarckopf and Van Galder told him of their encounter a few days prior and claimed to have "implored" him not to go. The Carnegie family, however, questions this claim, maintaining that permission was given by Chris Van Galder.
Despite the alleged warnings, on November 8 at roughly 15:30, Carnegie went for a walk alone, stating that he would return by 17:00. At 19:00, he had not returned, and Van Galder and Svarckopf called Mark Eikel, part owner of the Points North camp to assist them in their search. After scouring the camp, the trio noticed Carnegie's tracks leading outside the camp and followed them to the lake shore. The men noticed wolf tracks on the shore and returned to the camp to get a rifle before continuing their search. Carnegie's body was found soon after by Eikel outside the campgrounds, 35 miles northwest of Wollaston Lake. Using a flashlight, Eikel viewed the body from about 10 m (32 ft). He made no attempt to determine if Carnegie was alive or how he had been injured. Together with Svarckopf and Van Galder, who did not see the body, he retreated to Points North to notify the Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Royal Canadian Mounted Police
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police , literally ‘Royal Gendarmerie of Canada’; colloquially known as The Mounties, and internally as ‘The Force’) is the national police force of Canada, and one of the most recognized of its kind in the world. It is unique in the world as a national, federal,...
(RCMP) in Wallaston Lake of their discovery, informing police that Carnegie had been killed by wolves. The message that a person had been killed by wolves at Points North Camp was then forwarded to RCMP Constable Noey and local Coroner Rosalie Tsannie-Burseth. Meanwhile, Eikel and Points North employee Bob Burseth (Rosalie Tsannie-Burseth's husband) returned to the site about 40 minutes later to find the mutilated body and confirm that Carnegie was dead. Upon arriving at the scene three hours later, RCMP constable Noey saw from a distance of 30–40 metres the reflection of two sets of eyes, which he assumed were wolves because of wolf tracks seen earlier and because he had been told he was retrieving the body of a person killed by wolves. Notably, however, no wolves were ever observed at the scene of the accident as confirmed by Noey in the following quotes.
Many months after the accident, Coroner Tsannie-Burseth reported that during the recovery of the body, wolf howls were frequently heard in the vicinity. Her husband, Bob Burseth, who was also present, felt confident that they were within 400 metres of the kill site. However, in the official police statements recorded at the time of the accident, none of the witnesses, Coroner Tsannie-Burseth, or Constable Noey remembered hearing wolves vocalizing in any manner. Noey thought he might have heard wolves moving in the bushes but was not sure. Tsannie-Burseth stated that she could "feel' the presence of wolves but had heard nothing. To dissuade the animals from approaching, the search party built a fire and periodically fired shots into the air during the body recovery.
Rosalie Tsannie-Burseth, the province’s coroner
Coroner
A coroner is a government official who* Investigates human deaths* Determines cause of death* Issues death certificates* Maintains death records* Responds to deaths in mass disasters* Identifies unknown dead* Other functions depending on local laws...
for the north who had arranged the removal of Carnegie's body, gave a hypothetical reconstruction of what happened based on what she observed. She speculated that Carnegie had walked from the camp and by the time he was a kilometre away near a frozen lake, a wolf began following his tracks. Boot prints in the snow showed that Carnegie quickened his pace, as two more wolves approached him from the sides. The first apparent struggle occurred 2.2 metres (7 ft) from where the chase began. Four more scuffle sites were found leading to where his body was discovered. Tsannie-Burseth believed that Carnegie probably fought hard before finally succumbing.
National Geographic's Investigation
In spring 2006, National Geographic ChannelNational Geographic Channel
National Geographic Channel, also commercially abbreviated and trademarked as Nat Geo, is a subscription television channel that airs non-fiction television programs produced by the National Geographic Society. Like History and the Discovery Channel, the channel features documentaries with factual...
examined Carnegie's death in an hour-long episode of Hunter Hunted
Hunter Hunted (TV series)
Hunter and Hunted is a documentary on the National Geographic Channel. It is a show similar to CSI but focuses on animal attacks.-Episodes:*Ambushed *Horns of Death *Danger in the Delta...
entitled Shadow Stalkers. The credits acknowledge Coroner Rosalie Tsannie-Burseth, Constable Alphonse Noey, Dr. Paul Paquet, Dr. S. Herrero, and Tim Trottier of SERM (Saskatchewan Environment Resource Management). Wollaston Lake Coroner Rosalie Tsannie-Burseth and RCMP Constable Alphonse Noey are featured prominently in the documentary, providing commentary and personal insights concerning details of the accident. Animal behaviorist and wolf specialist Dr. Jane Packard, who assisted in the National Geographic investigation, reviewed the images taken by Todd Svarckopf and Chris Van Galder during their November 4 encounter with the wolves at Points North. Based on well understood wolf behaviors evident in the images, she speculated that Svarckopf and Van Galder had provoked the wolves. Notably, workers at Points North Camp had accused Svarckopf and Van Galder of "teasing" the wolves they encountered. She thought that negative experience might have caused the wolves to behave aggressively toward humans in future encounters. Renowned forensic anthropologist Dr. Gary Haynes conducted an onsite investigation of the accident site, interviewed key witnesses, and examined the images of Carnegie's body and tracks taken at the site by Constable Noey. The images were provided to National Geographic by the RCMP. Working together, Packard and Haynes concluded that Carnegie was killed by either wolves or a black bear, and that both might have fed on his body. Finally, the National Geographic investigation emphasized that the mix of uncertain circumstantial evidence implicated both wolves and bears, precluding the possibility of a definitive conclusion as to which predator was responsible for Carnegie's death.
Official investigation
The RCMP determined that Kenton Carnegie's death was not the result of a homicide. This was important because Carnegie's parents had initially raised concerns that their son had been murdered. The family claimed their son's relationships with colleagues from Sander Geophysics (Chris Van Galder and Todd Svarckopf) at Points North Camp were very strained and tense. The official Government of Saskatchewan investigation was headed by internationally renowned carnivore biologist and behavioral ecologist Dr. Paul Paquet and RCMP forensic anthropologist Dr. Ernest Walker, who oversaw Carnegie's autopsy, which was performed by Dr. N. Brits in Prince Albert, Saskatchewan. Brits stated that Carnegie's injuries were consistent with those expected in a predatory animal attack. Paquet and Walker concluded that the only likely candidates were wolves and American black bearAmerican black bear
The American black bear is a medium-sized bear native to North America. It is the continent's smallest and most common bear species. Black bears are omnivores, with their diets varying greatly depending on season and location. They typically live in largely forested areas, but do leave forests in...
s, as grizzly bear
Grizzly Bear
The grizzly bear , also known as the silvertip bear, the grizzly, or the North American brown bear, is a subspecies of brown bear that generally lives in the uplands of western North America...
s, cougars and free ranging dog
Dog
The domestic dog is a domesticated form of the gray wolf, a member of the Canidae family of the order Carnivora. The term is used for both feral and pet varieties. The dog may have been the first animal to be domesticated, and has been the most widely kept working, hunting, and companion animal in...
s were not known to frequent the Points North area. The report, however, was equivocal as to which predator was responsible, noting that most of the evidence, all of which was circumstantial, was unavoidably confounded by search and recovery efforts. In addition, the report contended that a very poor primary assessment of the accident scene by an inexperienced police constable and local coroner further compromised the quality and reliability of the evidence. Included among the criticisms were investigative bias resulting from preconditioned expectations of a "wolf attack" at Points North, failure to secure the accident scene from intrusion of people and wildlife, a 20-hour delay in carrying out the site assessment during which time at least three wolves visited the site, failure to cast impressions of footwear so that tracks of searchers and investigators could be distinguished from those of the victim, failure to annotate digital images taken on the accident scene, and serious discrepancies in important details of the official police report. These unresolvable problems were compounded by changing stories from key witnesses, RCMP investigator Constable Noey, and local coroner Tsannie concerning important and significant aspects of events that occurred before, after, and during the accident.
Two wolves from the area were killed about 56 hours after the accident by investigating conservation officers and taken for examination to the University of Saskatchewan
University of Saskatchewan
The University of Saskatchewan is a Canadian public research university, founded in 1907, and located on the east side of the South Saskatchewan River in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada. An "Act to establish and incorporate a University for the Province of Saskatchewan" was passed by the...
. The digestive systems of both wolves were empty, except for a few small residual items. One of the wolves, a black and white 48 kg (106 lb) male, estimated to be 4–5 years of age, was found to have undigested plasticised fabric, small black hairs, and what appeared to be connective tissue within its colon
Colon (anatomy)
The colon is the last part of the digestive system in most vertebrates; it extracts water and salt from solid wastes before they are eliminated from the body, and is the site in which flora-aided fermentation of unabsorbed material occurs. Unlike the small intestine, the colon does not play a...
and rectum
Rectum
The rectum is the final straight portion of the large intestine in some mammals, and the gut in others, terminating in the anus. The human rectum is about 12 cm long...
, though lab analyses showed the latter to be vegetable matter. Microscopic examination suggested that the recovered hair was possibly human in origin. However, DNA analyis by the RCMP forensic lab rejected that assessment. Given the high quality and excellent condition of the tissue samples (hairs complete with roots), the RCMP concluded the hairs were not of human origin. The lab tested only for human DNA, so the complete absence of DNA is strong evidence that the sample was not human. Accordingly, no human remains were found in the digestive systems of the wolves thought to have killed and fed on Carnegie.
There was no trace of rabies virus, nor was there any morphological indication suggesting it was a wolf-dog hybrid. The animal was described in the necropsy report as being very fat, well muscled and in excellent nutritional condition. Paquet later stated that "these were the healthiest wolves I've ever seen." Although he noted that "no definitive animal sign was evident in any of the images taken the night of the accident", he noted that wolf, fox, and bear tracks were visible on the photos taken the following day of the surrounding area. These images,taken 20–22 hours after the attack occurred, also showed unidientified shoe prints of several people. Paquet and Walker stated that the body had been dragged 50–60 metres as reported by RCMP Constable Noey, Burseth, and Eikel, as well as physically measured by Paquet at the scene. This suggested but did not confirm a black bear culprit, as black bears often drag their prey away from the initial kill and feeding site, especially following disturbances by people. In Paquet's own extensive experience and that of other wolf biologists, wolves are virtually unknown to drag larger prey (i.e. more than 40 kg) more than a few metres.
Paquet and Walker also pointed to the fact that Carnegie's heart, lungs and liver were intact, stating that in Paquet's experience and that of other wolf experts, wolves usually eat those organs and surrounding fat first. Moreover, the stomach, intestines, and kidneys were consumed first, which Paquet stated is unusual for wolves consuming wild prey. Consumption of these organs, however, is consistent with documented descriptions of black bears feeding on humans, especially victims who had recently consumed a meal. Notably, Carnegie ate lunch just before leaving on his walk. Paquet and Walker noted, however, that due to the scarcity of documented wolf attacks in North America, it would be difficult to discern what a wolf attack would look like. Mark McNay agreed.
This point of agreement is of profound significance because it confirms that interpretation of the circumstantial evidence found at the scene is fraught with irresolvable uncertainty. In this regard, Patterson commented that “... based on the material I did see it seemed less plausible that a bear was responsible than wolves, but I acknowledge that barring an actual eyewitness account a definitive answer will remain elusive.”
Similarly equivosal, but favoring the bear theory, bear specialist Wayne McRory concluded that a black bear was the probable predator after reviewing the physical evidence. Paquet's telephone consultations with bear expert Dr. Stephen Herrero came to the same conclusion: Herrero believed the responsible predator was likely a black bear.
Paul Paquet was quoted in an issue of the National Wildlife magazine;
The time of day of the attack was also claimed to be consistent with documented bear predation on humans;
Paquet and Walker also identified claw marks on the body, something inconsistent with wolves, which attack with their teeth. The claw marks were clearly distinguishable because the corresponding marks of lower and upper jaws that characterize bite wounds were absent from the body. Based on examination of bite impressions from 100 adult wolves and 100 adult black bears, Paquet and Walker concluded that it was difficult to reliably differentiate the bite marks of wolves and bears, as the canine teeth of adult wolves can leave near identical marks to those of similarly sized black bears. In addition, only 2 bite marks were clearly discernible on the body. Both were post- or peri-mortem and the canine teeth did not penetrate the skin. There were no impressions of pre-molars, which are characteristic of wounds caused by wolves In their report, Paquet and Walker stated that based on well described wolf behaviours (body postures, position of the lips, position of the ears, position of the tail), the 3 wolves shown in the photographs taken by Chris Van Galder were either relaxed or behaving defensively in response to a provocation by Svarckopf. Further, Svarckopf is shown relaxed and laughing in one of the images. Paquet questioned the reliability of interviews with the local constable and coroner, as well as members of the search party, due to numerous incongruities and his awareness that eyewitnesses were “notoriously unreliable”. Accordingly, inconsistencies, contradictions, and changing witness and investigator statements on critical points of evidence raised concerns about the credibility and reliability of the investigators and witnesses. Paquet and Walker's report listed 14 experts that were consulted, including well known wolf and bear biologists in North America and Europe, though it did not identify which experts examined the available evidence. Paquet later stated in a phone conversation with Ontario Government wildlife expert Brent Petterson that the animal that dragged Carnegie's body was strong enough to break his belt when his pants were pulled down over his legs and boots.
The investigative report by Paquet and Walker was met with criticism by the Carnegie family and their representatives. Todd Svarckopf, Chris Van Galder, Mark Eikel and Bob Burseth, who were the first four witnesses, saw the scene before it was disturbed by repeat visits by themselves and later visits from the coroner, two game wardens and the RCMP. According to Geist, all the witnesses stated in private interviews that the animals they saw on the scene, as well as the tracks in the snow, were wolves. However, Geist's claim is contradicted by the official police interviews. None of the witnesses remembered seeing any animals at the scene, although all witnesses reported observing wolf tracks. Bob Burseth, an employee of Points North Camp and a hunter who was frequently involved in tracking and killing of aggressive problem bears near Points North, confirmed that had bears been in the area, he would have known. He also stated that he knew the differences between bear and wolf tracks, and was adamant that on that night he saw only wolf prints. Burseth's wife, aboriginal Coroner Rosalie Tsannie-Burseth Aboriginal
Aboriginal peoples in Canada
Aboriginal peoples in Canada comprise the First Nations, Inuit and Métis. The descriptors "Indian" and "Eskimo" have fallen into disuse in Canada and are commonly considered pejorative....
, found no bear tracks and stated there were only wolf tracks. However, contrary to claims in McNay's report, neither Bob Burseth or Rosalie Tsannie-Ruseth identified fox tracks at the scene, although fox tracks were clearly evident in the images taken at the accident scene by Constable Noey. This failure to notice what were clear and obvious tracks raised serious concerns for government investigators about the reliability of Burseth's and Tsannie-Burseth's other observations. Constable Noey, an RCMP officer, originally claimed that some wolf prints were placed directly within Carnegie's prints, a behaviour some incorrectly believe is associated with wolves stalking prey. However, when queried by RCMP investigators from Major Crimes, he changed his story to say he was not certain that was the case. Conservation Officers Kelly Crayne and Mario Gaudet, who investigated the accident site two days after the event and several snowfalls, wrote in their report “Officers investigated the site and found numerous wolf tracks in the area. No other large animal tracks could be found.”
Bears had not been sighted at Points North Camp for over a month, as the death occurred during what some suggest is their annual hibernation
Hibernation
Hibernation is a state of inactivity and metabolic depression in animals, characterized by lower body temperature, slower breathing, and lower metabolic rate. Hibernating animals conserve food, especially during winter when food supplies are limited, tapping energy reserves, body fat, at a slow rate...
cycle. Nonetheless, there were many confirmed sightings of black bears in the region throughout October and early November, including nearby Cigar Lake Mine
Cigar Lake Mine
The Cigar Lake Mine is the largest undeveloped high grade uranium deposit in the world, located in the uranium rich Athabasca Basin of northern Saskatchewan, Canada....
and Rabbit Lake Mine. The Fall of 2005 was the second warmest on record and temperature influences the time of denning. In addition, aggressive and garbage-conditioned bears were a chronic problem at Points North Camp during September and early October, as well as previous years. Accordingly, McNay states that a problem bear was killed near the Points North Camp kitchen in September 2005, although SERM issued no permit to kill a bear, which is a legal requirement in the Province of Saskatchewan. In addition, the claimed killing of an aggressive problem black bear was never reported to SERM, so the fate of the animal(s)is unknown.
Private investigation
Dissatisfied with the government inquiry, Carnegie's family began spending scarce funds for an independent investigation and hired Harold Johnson, an aboriginal lawyer and tracker. Upon investigating the case, Johnson concluded that wolves were the culprits.After reading Paquet's report in August 2006, Carnegie's family approached Ontario Government wildlife expert Brent Petterson, to assess the evidence given by Paquet and Walker pointing to a bear culprit. Although Patterson corresponded with Paquet, and was initially convinced by his findings, he softened his views upon examining photographs and reports. Upon looking at the photograph showing what Patterson assumed were the bear tracks indicated by Paquet, Patterson noted that the snow in which they occurred was heavily slush
Slush
Slush can mean any of the following:* Slush — a slurry mixture of liquid and solid forms of water.* Slush — a pejorative and slang combination of the likewise derogatory terms slut and lush...
ed, and that a clear wolf print was present on a nearby rock, following the travel direction of the tracks. This suggested they were made by the same animal, although he was uncertain because of his inexperience in track identification.
Regarding the body's lack of disarticulation, Patterson stated that such a process only occurs after wolves have eaten all available soft tissues, which had yet to occur with Carnegie. This observation was consistent with Paquet and Walker's determination that most soft tissue had not been consumed, but contradicted claims by NcNay and Geist that nearly all soft tissue had been removed. Patterson also noted that lacerations on Carnegie's right forearm had flesh pulled out of them. Patterson wrote that this damage was likely caused by the canine teeth of a wolf, feeding on or dragging the body. However, Paquet and Walker determined the wound was caused by claws because there were no corresponding wounds from upper and lower jaws, which would be expected if jaws had been clamped around the arm so the body could be dragged. Patterson found that the drag distance of the body reported by Paquet was inconsistent with that reported by Constable Noey, who noted on a diagram of the accident scene that the body had been dragged only 20 metres. Noey, however, stated in his official narrative report cited and reviewed by Patterson, McNay, and Geist that the body was dragged about 50 m, which was consistent with the observation of other eyewitnesses. Further, the straight line distance as measured by a surveyors tape at the accident site was 52 metres.
Nevertheless, Patterson questioned the reliability of witness Bob Burseth who claimed the body was dragged more than 50 m, suggesting darkness and duress affected his judgment.
Among the photographed injuries present on the body, Patterson noted a bite mark on the right side of Carnegie’s right calf/ shin which he stated was consistent with the wolf bite marks he and his research team commonly observed on ungulate prey carcasses. Paquet and Walker identified the mark as occurring post mortem and indistinguishable from those left by black bears.
He also found that contrary to what Paquet said via telephone regarding the breaking of Carnegie's belt, there was no evidence of a belt on the photographs taken by the RCMP, nor was a belt mentioned in the personal effects list of the victim's necropsy report. However, primary witness Bob Burseth clearly stated in his official statement to the RCMP that he saw a belt when he first observed Carnegie's body. Patterson wrote that Carnegie was wearing lined nylon trousers, which he claimed do not have belt loops. In fact, Carnegie was wearing jeans with overpants. Although Patterson could not rule out the possibility that Kenton’s pants were peeled off first and then later snagged on the stump during dragging, he concluded that the removal of Carnegie's trousers, rather than being the deliberate act of a bear, could have occurred entirely due to wolves dragging his body and getting them caught on the tree stump. However, photographs of the body taken at the scene of the accident showed clearly this was not what happened. He saw no other evidence of clothing having been “peeled” off rather than simply ripped or torn during feeding. Criticism was also launched at Paquet's list of cited experts, as it failed to specify which of them actually examined the evidence. Patterson stated that he became suspicious when he contacted carnivore biologist Maria de Almeida of the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, who had been cited in Paquet's report as an expert. de Almeida was originally unaware that she was listed as an expert. In her communication with Patterson, she stated;
Working under a suggestion by Patterson, Carnegie's family later approached wolf biologist Mark McNay on 18 January 2007, who at the time, worked for the Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
The Alaska Department of Fish and Game is a department within the government of Alaska. The Department of Fish and Game manages Alaska's fish, game, and aquatic plant resources.-History:...
. Three years prior, McNay studied 80 events in Alaska and Canada where wolves closely approached or attacked people, finding 39 cases of aggression by apparently healthy wolves, and 29 cases of fearless behavior by non-aggressive wolves. After examining photographs of Carnegie's body and the area around it, McNay concluded that the argument in favour of a bear culprit was weak. He argued in his report that black bears at the time would have been hibernating 12 days before the attack occurred. In addition, even if a bear was still active, an ample food supply would have been available from the nearby landfill 2 km from the kill site. Regardless, none of the camp employees saw bears or bear tracks, either the month before or after the attack occurred. He countered the purported claim by Paquet and Walker that no pattern has been documented of "fatal wolf attacks" on humans in the evening or the autumn season by noting that wolf attacks had been documented in Ontario and Alaska during the late summer/autumn season and evening hours. However, Paquet and Walker responded by noting that McNay had mistakenly attributed a claim to them they never made. Further, they noted the attacks referred to by McNay were not fatal and were atypical of documented incidences. McNay also cited examples from Hazaribagh
Hazaribagh
Hazaribagh is a city and a municipality in Hazaribagh district in the Indian state of Jharkhand. It is the divisional headquarters of North Chotanagpur division. It is famous as a health resort and for Hazaribagh National Park ....
, India
India
India , officially the Republic of India , is a country in South Asia. It is the seventh-largest country by geographical area, the second-most populous country with over 1.2 billion people, and the most populous democracy in the world...
, in which children were recorded to have been attacked at dusk. After finding out about the dump site near the camp, and hearing the testimony of camp workers that wolves would consume garbage in full view of people, McNay read Todd Svarckopf's testimony on the non-lethal wolf encounter four days before Carnegie's death. He concluded that the behaviour of the wolves was consistent with food-conditioned animals that had been fed, and expected a food reward. He argued that the wolves would have trotted away if they had felt fearful or threatened. In contrast, the behaviour of one of the wolves described in the testimony and shown in the photographs was indicative of a wolf in an aroused state and capable of an attack. After looking at the tracks shown in the photographs taken by the RCMP, he affirmed that he could not see any bear tracks. He stated that any similarity in the shape of any of those tracks to either a bear or wolf foot was purely coincidental, due to the overflow obliterating the true foot shape. He also stated that the assumption that a bear made the tracks could be disproved by the direction they were heading. If it was a bear, the triangular shape of the tracks would have indicated that the animal was moving toward the position of the photographer, but close examination revealed that the animal was travelling away from that direction. This was confirmed after McNay showed the photographs to five experienced Alaskan Pilots and wolf trackers, three of which were biologists of the ADFG, whereas the other two formerly worked as wolf survey pilots in Yellowstone National Park
Yellowstone National Park
Yellowstone National Park, established by the U.S. Congress and signed into law by President Ulysses S. Grant on March 1, 1872, is a national park located primarily in the U.S. state of Wyoming, although it also extends into Montana and Idaho...
. None of the five individuals, however, were identified. McNay gave additional evidence for wolves making the prints by describing their track pattern;
McNay noted that Carnegie's body lacked the severe head trauma and broken bones he believed to be characteristic of a fatal bear attack. He argued that the areas of Carnegie's body where flesh had been removed were inconsistent with bear feeding patterns; most of the stomach and intestines were eaten, and a large portion of the muscle mass from the ribs to the knees was consumed. From this, McNay pointed out that bears are solitary feeders, and claimed without providing evidence that victims usually have only one area of their body eaten; whereas those of wolves, which feed collectively, will have multiple areas of their body consumed, as in Carnegie's case. He then argued that the amount of flesh consumed in the short time of the victim's death (estimated by him to be 70–80 lb (32–36 kg) of what was once 145 lb (66 kg) made a bear more unlikely;
As with Patterson, McNay cited the bruise on Carnegie’s right lower leg (measured 4 × 2.5 cm), as well as what appeared to be bite mark impressions associated with the bruising as further evidence of wolf involvement. He stated that the position of the marks on the right shin indicated that the bite had been inflicted from the front or side, which was consistent with injuries observed in 13 survivors of wolf attacks in Alaska and Canada. In many of these cases, the initial bites were fleeting and occurred in the hands or legs, and left only torn clothing, scratched skin, or minor puncture wounds. For comparison, McNay provided photographs of wolf-inflicted bites on three people. In one such photograph, the bite mark and bruising inflicted on the victim (Canadian biologist Robert Mulders) was similar in size and location to that seen on Carnegie's leg. Another photo, featuring the injured lower back of a six year old boy attacked by a wolf near Icy Bay Canada, showed bite marks ½-3 cm in length; many of which were similar to those found near the nose, eyes, and right arm of Carnegie’s body.
Regarding the inversion of Carnegie's pants, McNay pointed out that eyewitness Bob Burseth claimed that Carnegies pants were still on when he and Mark Eikel returned to the accident scene to inspect the body the second time. It was only when they returned with the RCMP two hours and twenty minutes later that the pants were completely removed from the legs and ankles, pulled tightly over Carnegie's large winter boots. McNay theorized that the pants had been removed accidentally after they got caught on a tree stump whilst the body was being dragged. However, Paquet and Walker have noted that examination of drag marks evident in images of Carnegie's body taken at the accident site easily disprove the theory.
In response to Paquet's assertion that wolves typically do not drag victims above 40 kg, McNay cited five cases in Canada and Alaska, as well as 195 cases from India where wolves attempted to drag/carry off their human victims when rescuers arrived. Paquet and Walker, however, made no such assertion. As quoted above (see Official Investigation), they maintained that is extremely rare for wolves to drag larger prey more than 10 metres in one direction because individual wolves typically pull in different directions, which eventually disarticulates carcasses. Moreover, the citations provided by McNay as proof that wolves drag their prey, described only children weighing less than 40 kg; which confirmed Paquet and Walker’s initial claim that McNay was attempting to dispute. McNay did provide an example (as well as photo) of a moose calf dragged by 2 wolves for 20 metres weighing 150 lb (68 kg).
McNay also claimed that Carnegie's body had already lost most of its original mass, therefore facilitating the dragging process. This claim, however, contradicted Patterson's observation that most soft tissue had not been consumed. After reviewing Constable Noey's description of the tracks within the attack site, he found them consistent with those of a long struggle characteristic of wolf attacks;
McNay speculated that had a black bear killed Carnegie, only to have it usurped by wolves, there would have been a lengthy period of confrontation between the animals; resulting in well represented tracks around the kill site. He argued that Paquet's organ theory was flawed, because wolves and bears will eat all organs given the chance, and the wolves had been interrupted whilst feeding. Also, seeing as Carnegie was likely their first human victim, it would have been impossible to extrapolate normal, specific feeding behaviours.
However, McNay agreed with Paquet's viewpoint on the scarcity of fatal wolf attacks in North America making it difficult to discern with certainty what one looked like, stating in his report:
Ethologist Dr. Valerius Geist of the University of Calgary
University of Calgary
The University of Calgary is a public research university located in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Founded in 1966 the U of C is composed of 14 faculties and more than 85 research institutes and centres.More than 25,000 undergraduate and 5,500 graduate students are currently...
Alberta
Alberta
Alberta is a province of Canada. It had an estimated population of 3.7 million in 2010 making it the most populous of Canada's three prairie provinces...
, who had himself experienced aggressive behaviour from wolves in his home on Vancouver Island
Vancouver Island
Vancouver Island is a large island in British Columbia, Canada. It is one of several North American locations named after George Vancouver, the British Royal Navy officer who explored the Pacific Northwest coast of North America between 1791 and 1794...
began investigating case in the Winter of 2006. Upon examining the photographs taken by Todd Svarckopf and Chris Van Galder, he found that one of the animals had exposed canines, a raised upper lip, the corners of its mouth slightly opened and ears pitched forward. The wolf was positioned in a slight crouch with its hind legs braced for a lunge forward. The tail was held in a position bordering on neutral/confident. Its eyes were also averted, to which he stated that in wolf communication is done by confident, domineering individuals . He stated that rather than a defensive posture usually taken by wolves feeling threatened, it was one of assertive aggression with no hint of fear or insecurity. Finnish biologist Kaarlo Nygrén of the Game and Fisheries Research Institute of Ilomantsi
Ilomantsi
Ilomantsi is municipality and a village of Finland.It is located in the province of Eastern Finland and is part of the North Karelia region. The municipality has a population of and covers an area of of which is water. The population density is...
gave a similar conclusion on examining the photographs. However, noted ethologist and wolf specialist Dr. Harry Frank, who was asked by Geist to review his report, concluded that Geist's interpretation was in serious error. Dr. Frank's assessment concurred with that of Drs. Paquet and Walker as well as Dr. Jane Packard of National Geographic.
Geist also examined photographs of where Carnegie died, and notes given by the RCMP on Carnegie's movements reconstructed from tracks. Geist found the bear hypothesis more doubtful upon reading in the hypothetical reconstruction that Carnegie was repeatedly knocked down and got up before dying. This, he reasoned, would make a bear unlikely, as bears are adept at pinning down prey and preventing them from standing. Geist also suggested that bears, after making a kill, usually drag it into heavy brush to eat in peace, whereas Carnegie was immediately eaten in the open after he died; a behaviour consistent with wolves. Paquet has noted, however, that there is no evidence that Carnegie was eaten immediately after being killed as time of death is unknown. Geist responded to a statement that he incorrectly attributed to Paquet that only a bear would have dragged Carnegie's body, by pointing out that the body was only seen to be dragged after the RCMP officer arrived on the scene, added to the fact that the body was not hidden in vegetation as Geist believes a bear would have done. In addition, Geist claimed that upon looking at the photographs showing tracks surrounding Carnegie's body, the tracks belonged to wolves of varying size, with no sign of bear or other animals. Yet, according to all other investigators, no images were taken at the scene or are in evidence that show Kenton's body and discernable wolf or bear tracks. Geist seemed to have confused images of the body taken the night of the attack with those shot some 15 hours after Carnegie's body was recovered. The later images revealed the tracks of people, wolves, foxes, and possibly black bear; but none taken at the specific location where the body was found showed any tracks.
Geist sent copies of the photographs of the scene to European biologists Dr. Eirik Granqvist of Borgå, Finland
Finland
Finland , officially the Republic of Finland, is a Nordic country situated in the Fennoscandian region of Northern Europe. It is bordered by Sweden in the west, Norway in the north and Russia in the east, while Estonia lies to its south across the Gulf of Finland.Around 5.4 million people reside...
and Dr. Nygrén. Upon inspecting the photos, they both came to the same conclusion, responding;
Subsequently, Geist revised his official statement to include the tracks of fox. Geist was unable to find any evidence of bear predation on the body, based on the nature of the bite marks. In his report, he wrote that contrary to the statement by Paquet that “The clothes and skin been stripped away, indicating the so-called banana-peel eating technique common to bears”, the skin had not been peeled back. The photography revealed typical wolf inflicted injuries, including clean cuts, and slices cut somewhat at right angles to the bones, consistent with carnassials cutting the tissue. Black bears on the other hand pluck flesh with their incisors, as their molars are blunt and are evolved for crushing rather than slicing. Geist, upon observing the amount of missing tissue concluded that in the three hours before the body's discovery, at least three and possibly four wolves had fully fed on 35–40 kg (77-88 lb) of body mass. A black bear would have been unlikely to have consumed that much body tissue in the short time available. In response to Paquets statement that intact organs suggested wolves were not involved, Geist pointed to his own observations and those of Russian and European scientists, citing cases in which some wolf packs preferred to consume the fat deposits first, as had been the case with Carnegie.
Geist commented on the nature of the bruises on Carnegie's shin;
Inquest
The Chief Coroner's confidential investigative report was completed in the summer of 2006 and given to the Carnegie family for review. The report determined Carnegie was killed by either wolves or a black bear, and that the poorly conducted initial investigation and uncertainty of circumstantial evidence precluded a definitive conclusion. An Inquest date of February 2007 was then called by the Chief Coroner, but was rescheduled for 29 October 2007.The presiding judge concluded that Geist lacked relevant expertise and did not qualify as an expert witness, which prohibited inclusion of his affidavit and testimony. She noted that Geist had never published a peer-reviewed paper or had a grant proposal funded concerning wolves or bears. Similarly, Patterson was also excluded as an expert by the judge, but his evaluation was introduced indirectly by the Carnegie Family's attorney, Harold Johnson. Paquet, Walker, and McNay were deemed qualified experts and all testified at the inquest. The Province of Saskatchewan chose not to present an affirmative case supporting the findings of the Chief Coroner. Accordingly, the lawyer reprsenting the crown did not carry out in depth examinations of witnesses. Further, judicial inquests in Saskatchewan apply a much lower standard for determining cause of death (balance of probabilities or 51%) than do determinations by the Chief Coroner (reasonable doubt or 95%). On 1 November 2007, following three days of testimony and examination of photographs of Carnegie's body and the site of the accident, a six member jury concluded that wolves were responsible for Carnegie's death.
Aftermath
Dr. Paul Paquet stood firmly by his initial conclusion that Carnegie was killed by either wolves or a black bear, but circumstantial evidence was inconclusive as to which predator was responsible; "The jury's decision was a poor one, which I'd put in the same category as 'O.J. Simpson is innocent'". He continued to cite the extensive dragging of the body and atypical choice of organs consumed from the body as evidence against wolves, and reiterated that it is not true that all black bears at that period would have been hibernating. He also noted that the presence of wolf tracks was compelling evidence implicating wolves but not definitive proof that wolves were responsible for Carnegie's death. Paquet maintained that the reports by McNay, Geist, and Patterson that were commissioned by the Carnegie family were seriously flawed, riddled with factual mistakes, misinterpretations, logical inconsistencies, and relevant omissions. He maintained that McNay and Geist overreached with the evidence and confused theory and assumptions with fact and proof, while consistently ignoring relevant information. He stated that McNay provided no basis for his estimate on the amount of flesh consumed from the body, which was a gross exaggeration resulting from McNay's confusion between volume and mass. Paquet argued that the pathologist who carried out the autopsy estimated 25% of the body volume was consumed, all soft tissue and internal organs. Based on rigorous forensic techniques, Paquet and Walker estimated 8–10 kg of soft tissue was consumed. Significantly, most large muscle masses were left intact, with the skin completely torn away. The most egregious omission identified was the misrepresentation and distortion of the major finding of Paquet and Walker that Carnegie was killed by wolves or a black bear. McNay and Geist consistently and falsely claimed that Paquet and Walker concluded that Carnegie was killed by a black bear. Overall, he accused McNay and Geist of failing to exercise prudence, caution, and due diligence when dealing with physical and circumstantial evidence of questionable quality and reliability. Further, Paquet showed that Patterson’s conclusions were largely based on incorrect information.Dr. L. David Mech
L. David Mech
Lucyan David "Dave" Mech is an internationally recognized wolf expert, a senior research scientist for the U.S. Department of the Interior's U.S. Geological Survey , and an adjunct professor at the University of Minnesota in St. Paul...
, an internationally recognized wolf expert, stated; "Mr Carnegie's death is a terrible tragedy but one fatal wolf attack in the recorded history of North America does not warrant widespread alarm".
Valerius Geist launched criticism on the official investigation, stating that it was too focused on establishing Carnegie’s cause of death, while ignoring wider policy issues such as the alleged failure of some wolf biologists to notice that the wolves of that area had been acting in an unusually bold manner toward humans before the attack, and that there was no real action taken to tackle the circumstances which he believed had led to the attack; freely available human waste added to a scarcity of natural prey, stated by Geist to be a result of increased wolf populations. He also criticised the wildlife officials of the area for taking no action against wolves clearly showing signs of habituation to humans until it was too late. He pointed to the fact that wolves had been sighted in the area weeks before Carnegie's death, and would frequently feed at the Point North garbage dump whilst ignoring workers. This he argued, caused the wolves to no longer see humans as a source of fear, but of food. In conclusion to his report, he wrote;
Kenton's father, Kim, expressed concern that the Saskatchewan Environments plan to stop further wolf attacks were inadequate, and did not address the problem of landfills which were thought to have been fed upon by the wolves, causing them to become habituated to humans. He stated that the best measure would be to incinerate the garbage, rather than to abandon it.
See also
- Wolf attacks on humansWolf attacks on humansA wolf attack is an attack on a human by a wolf or wolves. Under normal circumstances, wild wolves are generally timid around humans. Wolves usually try to avoid contact with people, to the point of even abandoning their kills when an approaching human is detected, though there are several reported...
- Dingo attacks on humans
- Bear attacksBear attacksA bear attack is an attack by any mammal of the Ursidae family, on another animal, although it usually refers to bears attacking humans or domestic pets. Bear attacks are relatively rare, but frequent enough to be of concern for those who are in bear habitats...